Crime prevention solutions for Europe:
Designing Out Crime
Paul van Soomeren
Conference on the relationship between the physical environment and crime reduction and prevention.
Szczecin - Poland: 19 - 21 October 2000 As edited 1 November 2000
Van Dijk, van Soomeren en Partners BV (DSP) DSP research and consultancy
Van Diemenstraat 374 1013 CR Amsterdam
The Netherlands
tel: +31 (0)206257537 fax: +31 (0)20627 47 59 info: dSp@dsp-advies.nl
e-mail: bmarkestein@dsp-advies.nl Website: www.dsp-advies.nl
Table of contents
1 Crime: a diverse phenomenon 2 Explaining crime
3 Designing out crime: teething troubles 4 The challenge
5 European standard on designing out crime 6 A European standard: TC325
7 Standard on urban planning and crime reduction 8 Introductionary questions: where. what and who?
9 Urban planning and design guidelines 10 Process
11 European standard: conclusions 12 Sharing knowledge and experiences 13 Conclusion
Page 2 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime
3 4 7
9 10 11 12 13 15 16 18 19 20
DSP -Amsterdam
r
1 Crime: a diverse phenomenon
Crime is a phenomenon resembling somewhat the famous dragon with several heads. There are more than 25 types of crime to be distinguished.
Besides crime there is fear of crime which is a different phenomenon.
Crime
Violence within households
Shoplifting Vandalism Bribery
Kidnapping Theft
Pickpocketing
Fraud Burglary Drugs trafficking
Grafitti Murder
Environmental crimes Traffic crimes
Sexual offences
Theft of (motor)cycles Workplace crimes
Violence in public space
Corruption
Violence in semi public space
car theft
Threats Robbery
Arson
Fear of crime
In this paper we wil! focus on the types of crime concentrated in urban environments and having an opportunistic nature. In short: crimes which might be reduced by urban planning and building design.
Crime
Shoplifting Vandalism
Theft
Pickpocketing
Burglary
Grafitti
Traffic crimes Theft of (motor)cycles
Violence in public space
Violence in semi public space
car theft
Robbery
Sexual offences Arson
Page 3 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime
Fear of crime
DSP . Amsterdam
2 Explaining crime
Urbanisation
The strongest factor explaining crime risks across different countries is urbanisation. This was proven - again - by the extensive world wide victim survey in which several European countries participate: the International Crime Victim Survey.
Nature or nurture
The strongest factor explaining risks across different countries:
International Crime Victims Survey Pat Mayhew and Jan van Dijk
The traditional explanations for crime fall into the category of the nature versus nurture debate.
Does nature and what it contributes to our biology and heredity influence how people become criminal? Are we affected by diet, body chemistry and our genetic hardwiring just as birds are programmed to migrate south, or as fish return to the same riv ers ? Are these the factors that create a propensity to misbehave?
Or is nurture the answer? Does our upbringing determine our behaviour?
Do our family and our friends influence us to, or not to, commit crime? We hear our parents warning us about learning bad behaviour by hanging out with the wrong kids. We see children abused by their parents, who then themselves become parental abusers. These are the stories of the nurture debate.
The nature and nurture explanations are still with us today. Nurture explanations are personality theories. Nature explanations are called environment theories. Together with a third a
p
proach, opportunity theory, they constitute the major streams of thought that have been created to explain and prevent crime.What policy-makers needed (and still need) is n�t 50 much a scientific Page 4 Crime prevention solutions tor Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
ti
Note 1
explanation of crime, but a method of tackling crime to make it more manageable. It was these developments in the scientific world and the need of policy-makers tor feasible methods that led criminologists to search tor alternatives to the personality and environment theories about crime and criminais. This is why opportunity theory emerged in the 19605 and 197051•
This theory stressed the importance of the triangle offender - situation - victim.
situation
crime
offender victim
A criminal offence will only take place if all three factors are present. This approach focuses on the situation in which an offender meets - or seeks - a victim; be it a person to assault, a bank to rob or a house to burgie.
We should add th at the concept of opportunity had already appeared in 19th-centruy criminological publications. Until the first half of the 20th century however, it was not considered to be very relevant. Opportunity as a usefull'concept for crime prevention was elaborated upon around 1920 by researchers of the Chicago School (see: Local strategies for the reduction of urban insecurity in Europe, the physical urban environment and reduction of urban insecurity. Standing Conference of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe, Council of Europe - Strasbourg 1989, pages 219-234).
Page 5 Crime pre vent ion solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
In this approach the focus also shifted from a reactive point of view - take action af ter a crime has occurred - to a more pro-active stand - take action before a crime occurs and prevent the offence -.
How to tacklejreduce crime:
react or prevent
Before: prevention, pro
active approach
offender victim
After: reactive, repressive approach
One of the most productive areas where the opportunity approach has proved its worth is in urban planning and building design. A great number of experiments have shown that particular types of crime can be reduced by modifying the opportunity for crime in the built environment. Moving the night-time tavern crowd away from vacant storefronts af ter closing time wil! inevitably reduce the number of break-ins and vandalism incidents to the stores. Controlling the access into, and natural sightlines through, underground parking areas wil! increase the opportunity for criminals to be seen and caught. This in turn wil! reduce the number of assaults and auto crimes in that parking areas. The list of successful opportunity reduction examples goes on. In Canada and the USA this has come to be known as crime prevention through environmental design - CPTED (pronounced sep-ted)2.
In Europe the concept is also known as ' the reduction of crime and fear of crime by urban planning and architectural design'. In short Designing out crime (DOC).
Note 2 The concept of CPTED is also used in the world wide association of researchers, specialists and practitioners in th is field: the International CPTED Association (lCA; see
www.CPTED.net). In fact, most of the text in this paragraph is taken from a draft text of the president of the ICA Greg Saville.
Page 6 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
3 Designing out crime: teething troubles
In the beginning the new situational and pro-active approach was hampered by some serious teething problems.
Physical determinism
Some authors lost track of the human - the social - factor. By placing too much emphasis on the physical environment these authors torgot the offender and victim. A securer and safer city is the result of a safety policy aiming at the physical AND the social environment.
Don't:
•
lose sight of offender (and vietim)
•
only look at physical va ria bles Lesson:
•
physical environment
•
social environment } = safer securer city
Design and maintenance: two sides of a coin
Some practitioners focussed completely on urban planning and building design forgetting that every new built neighbourhood, public space or building needs good maintenance. Without that every plan and design will deteriorate and will be destroyed.
Don't:
•
focus only on planning and design Lesson:
+
urban planning
+
architeetural design
+
MAINTENANCE
�
=safer securer city
Structured partnership
In the beginning every group of crime prevention practitioners was too eager to win the battle all by themselves.
It took a while before crime prevention was seen as a joint responsibility of Page 7 Crime prevention solutions tor Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
different sectors of society and therefore needing a broad based multi
agency approach or co-ordination of public authorities, politicians, the private and voluntary sector, police, residents, urban planners, architects and the maintenance sector.
Don't:
see crime prevention as an approach which can be employed by one group practioners (only police, only planners, only architects, etc) Lesson:
what is needed is a multi agency approach, structured partnership: authorities
+police
+planners
+architects
+residents
+etc.
All these teething problems have been overcome nowadays resulting in what is of ten called 'the second generation of designing out crime'.
Page 8 Crime prevention solutions tor Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
'!
4 The challenge
Designing out crime is a real, effective and mature crime prevention policy.
However, this policy is still little known by local and regional authorities.
They still seem to be unclear on:
• what to do; the ingredients, measures, best practices,
• how to do it; the implementation, the process.
Not only local and regional authorities are lacking information. The same goes for all other stakeholder agencies like the police, urban planners, architects, insurers and residents.
This conference will no doubt be an instrument for disseminating knowledge about designing out crime.
But there are more ways to reach th is goal: reports, brochures, a CD rom containing best practices, a website or a helpdesk.
The question how to implement a concrete designing out crime project in your city or town is answered by instruments explaining how to structure a building or planning process to incorporate crime prevention.
In the UK, the Netherlands and France there are already examples of such instruments.
National instruments to structure process incorporating crime prevention
• Risk Assessment Modeis, UK Building Research Establishment, Insurance companies
• Veiligheidseffectrapportage (VER) (secure/crime assessment report), Netherlands - Ministry of Interior
• L'Étude Préable de la Sécurité Publique (EPSP), France
• Also: UK/Netherlands: Police label Safe Housing Secured by Design
• European level: eEN - European Standard
Page 9 Crime prevention solutions tor Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP . Amsterdam
5 European standard on designing out crime
At the European level an interesting initiative is now underway: a European standard on crime reduction by urban planning and building design.
Why standardisation?
The idea of one huge European market will benefit greatly if some
products, processes and services are synchronised. Voluntary agreement between countries, institutes and people on what a product or process is, what it must look like, what it should do or accomplish is th us important.
For that purpose standards are a key component of the united European market.
Standardisation facilitates communication between different participants or stakeholders working in one process or implementing a project; e.g. crime prevention projects. Standards thus facilitate co-operation and
collaboration making processes more transparent. Note: following a standard is something people as weil as organisations do on a purely voluntary basis: ' compliance is not compulsory'.
In the mid nineties it was decided to try to draft a general type of standard - in part a process standard. This standard had to focus on the possibilities local and regional authorities, urban planners, architects and building engineers have to reduce crime and fear of crime together with the police, security firms, insurers and residents.
Page 10 Crime prevention solutions tor Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP . Amsterdam
6 A European standard: TC 325
CEN (Comité Europeen de Normalisation) is the official body ruling the arena in which a new standard is made. Looking at it from a very long distance the process is rather easy. All one has to do is write a short text - of say 25 pages long - in which is explained how one could reduce crime and tear ot crime by urban planning and building design. However, th is work takes at least 5 years because 100% consensus and agreement trom all European countries and all European stakeholder organisations (police, architects, planners, security, and insurance) is essential. As we said betore: a standard is a voluntary agreement.
The political agreement is reached in an official committee (Technical Committee or TC) set up tor the purpose of making a standard. Experts in Working Groups do the real work.
In January 1996 the Technical Committee 325 of CEN (TC325) held its tirst meeting in Denmark .
The scope of TC325 is:
"Preparation of European standards on building design and urban planning to provide performance requirements for the prevention of crime in residential areas at new and existing housing, including local shops, in order to ensure safety and comfort and to mini mise fear of violence.
Standards on building products and security devices are excluded."
It was decided to organise the work in three Working Groups.
1 WG 1 on Terminology. This Working Group concentrates on terms and definitions and is 'fed' by the other two WG's. This WG is chaired by France.
2 WG 2 on Urban Planning. The Netherlands (Paul van Soomeren, DSP) chairs this Working Group.
3 The UK chairs WG 3 on building design of dwellings, shops and offices.
Page 1 1 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
7 Standard on urban planning and crime reduction
As an example we will concentrate here on the draft standard made by Working Group 2 on Urban Planning.
The aim of Working Group 2 is to provide those engaged in urban planning and environmental crime prevention - as weil as all stakeholders Iike authorities and residents - with advice. guidance and checklists on effective multi-agency act ion needed to mini mise the risk for crime and fe ar of crime.
Note that the text ot the European standard tor crime prevention by urban planning must be used in a concrete situation. For example a new building plan on the outskirts of Paris. a plan for the renovation of an old harbour site in Szczecin, or the planning of a city centre in Berlin.
The text of the standard is divided in three main parts:
• The introduction which poses three questions: where, what and who?
• Design guidelines - one might say tips and tricks for urban planners - to help the user of the standard.
• A process flow chart explaining how a good CPTED3 process operates step by step.
Note 3 CPTED: Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design; or: the reduction of crime and fe ar of crime by urban planning and architectural - or building - design.
Page 12 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
11
8 Introductionary questions: where, what and who?
First the introduction of the standard:
Although there may be a variety of actors involved, in theory, the approach is always simpie. It starts with answering th ree questions:
• where? - the identification of the exact location of the area and the type of area;
• what? - the identification of the crime problems occurring in this existing area or the problems that may in future occur in this new area;
• who? - the identification of the stakeholders involved in defining the problem and implementing the measures to prevent and reduce the crime problem.
Where? - type of area
The focus of the European CPTED-standard is on urban areas and within this focus eight types of areas can be distinguished:
1 residential;
2 schools/youth facilities;
3 commercial/industrial/offices;
4 shopping/retail;
5 parks;
6 leis ure centres
7 public transport facilities, like stations, busstops, car parking, garages used only for petrol stations, etc.;
8 city/town centres and public space.
Of course several mixed types are also possible, for example a mainly residential area with some schools, a youth facility, some shops and a smalt park. Important is that the area under consideration may be new or existing.
What? - problem identification
Having identified the area the next question is: what is the problem in this area or what problems may in future arise in th is development. The broad distinction in the standard is that bet ween specific types of crimes and fear of crime.
Crime:
• burglary (residential/commercial);
• vandalism;
• street violence;
• car crime;
• theft;
• arson.
Fear of crime
Who? - stakeholders
To prevent crime and fear of crime in new and existing areas it is inevitable to involve stakeholders - people and organisations having a stake or vested interest in the problem and/or solution. In sum the table presents an
overview of possible stakeholders/target groups':
• politicians, authorities;
• designers and urban planners;
• builders, public or private developers;
Page 13 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
I I
I I
• poliee;
• security and risk professionals such as private security firms and insurance companies;
• munieipal services;
• soeial wor kers;
• residents, shop owners, users, public.
Af ter the 'where, what and who-questions' have been answered there remain two important issues to be solved:
• What guidelines ean be given for strategies, measures and actions whieh are neeessary and feasible to make an area more safe and secure?
• How will these strategies, measures and aetions be implemented and executed? What will the co-operation proeess look like in whieh all stakeho/ders participate?
Page 14 Crime prevention solutions tor Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
'l
I9 Urban planning and design guidelines
The standard identifies several guidelines on what measures and action one may take. These measures are presented in a framework using the eight types of environment distinguished earl ier . On eight pages - each focussing on one type of environment - the specific types of crime problems identified earl ier are presented.
Not all strategies are effective in all environments and in all circumstances.
Some strategies help only in specific environments or only help to prevent specific types of crime.
For this reason, the strategies have to be chosen according to their expected effectiveness in certain types of environments and against certain types of crime.
If the stakeholders responsible for the choice of strategies know trom the crime analysis or risk assessment which types ot crime are relevant in their case, they can look tor the best strategies in the list specific for their type of environment.
These lists tor all eight types of environments are included in an annex to the standard.
Page 15 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
1 0 Process
The central idea of this European standard on crime prevention by urban planning is that in a given situation all stakeholders involved will discuss the list of strategies and measures presented in the Standard while
focussing on a concrete plan for building or refurbishment in say Warsawa, Paris or Amsterdam.
A project team, working team or working group is the platform for this discussion. A definitive set of strategies and concrete measures, will be chosen according to space, time, budget and personal preferences; the definitive measures wi/l be recommended by the working group to a responsible body of authorities taking the final decision.
In the standard a step by step method is presented to help and support an effective and efficient process of implementation, execution and
evaluation. This process part of the standard resem bles procedures elaborated in the international standards on Ouality Management (ISO 9000 series) as weil as standards on occupational health and safety management and standards on environmental systems (ISO 14001).
A flow chart is presented showing essential steps:
• The issuing of a general mission statement for a plan or project by the responsible authorities. They must initiate a process aimed at preventing crime and fear of crime in a new or existing environment.
This • mission statement' may be of a rather general and vague nature.
• If not vet in operation a multi-disciplinary working group wil! be set up which should include representatives of the stakeholder organisations involved in this particular design/planning process. The working group will follow a procedure including six weil defined steps:
Step 1: Assessment or analysis
The working group shall analyse the present or future crime preventive and fear reducing performance of the environment specified in the mission statement.
Step 2: Objectives
The working group shall define more precisely the objectives being pursued and the time by which they should be attained (project plan, milestones). It shall establish the objectives in more specific quantifiable figures. To choose realistic anchor points, the working group may use values, taken from a similar city, area or neighbourhood serving as a reference. The working-group could indicate the objective values as @equal to@,
@minimum 00% better@ or @maximally 00% worse@ than the reference area.
Step 3: Plan
The working group shall draft a plan which contains three things:
1 a proposal of what most probably will happen in the near future if no measures are taken to prevent crime and/or fe ar of crime; the method of drafting scenarios might prove to be a useful tooi in this stage;
2 strategies probably most effective to reach the safety and security objectives formulated in step 2; .
3 measures and actions to be taken including costs and anticipated effects. The ideal would be to present in the standard - or on a separate web site - ideas about possible measures taken from real and concrete Page 16 Crime prevention solutions tor Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
t I
examples from different European eountries and eities. However, the resources to search, analyse and present these types of best - or worst - practices are not yet avai/able.
The working group shall present the plan to the responsible bOdy of authorities and all stakeholders.
Step 4: Decision by (Iocal or regionalJ authorities
The authorities shall decide which strategies and measures have to be implemented.
When a final decision on the measures is taken, this wi/l be laid down in a contract between all stakeholders.
Step 5: Action and implementation
During this step the measures described in the contract just mentioned are imp/emented.
Step 6: Checking and corrective action
In this last step the measures which have been taken will be evaluated.
In case crime prob/ems and/or fear of crime OCcur at an unacceptab/e level authorities decide upon corrective action, such as taking additional crime preventive measures or further refurbishment of the area.
Page 1 7 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime
DSP • Amsterdam
11 European standard: conclusions
In sum this standard on the reduction of crime and fear of crime by urban planning presents the user with:
• ideas on how to tackle and prevent crime by urban planning;
• a procedure on how to organise the CPTED process in the best possible way.
Again ... such a standard is NOT a law; it is not obligatory to use the standard.
But if a group of stakeholders or local/regional authorities are in charge of a concrete building pro
j
ect, they can agree on using this standard. From that moment on the standard becomes a 'voluntary code' folio wed by all stakeholders in the project.The drafting of this European standard on Designing out crime by urban planning and building design is now at the halfway stage with several European countries are participating (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Estonia, UK, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Switzerland, France, Italy, Spain).
However there are still countries that seem to be unaware of the
importance of such a European standard: some countries do not participate and in some cases specialists participating in the working groups are lacking the necessary governmental back up and funding.
It is also regretted by some that the initiative of drafting a European standard is not combined with e.g. building a website containing best (or worst) practices. Such a website could be used as a kind of helpdesk for local and regional authorities looking for ways to reduces or prevent crime by urban planning and building design.
Page 18 Crime prevention solutions tor Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP - Amsterdam
12 Sharing knowledge and experiences
One can also see other ways and means to share knowledge and exchange best practices amongst researchers and specialists.
In 1996 the International CPTED Association (tCA) started as an forum for specialists, researchers, trainers and practitioners. In 1 999 DOCA was born in the UK: the Designing Out Crime Association, again to act as a discussion forum for urban planners, architects, crime prevention experts and police officers le.g. ALO's; Architectural liaison Officers).
In April 2000 the UK initiative was followed by a 'look a like' association tor continental Europe: E-DOCA, the European Designing Out Crime Association which will be opening it's website soon (www.E-DOCA.net).
Page 19 Crime prevention solutions tor Europe: Designing Out Crime
DSP - Amsterdam
1 3 Conclusion
To conclude one might say that there are several initiatives. Besides forming associations like ICA, DOCA. UK and E-DOCA there is also
emerging an official European standard on the reduction of crime and fear of crime through urban planning and building design.
Furthermore there are groups of practitioners doing their individual projects: designing out crime.
However, to end this presentation in a rather provocative way, one might say that loc al and regional authorities and politicians are not vet active enough in th is field. Untill now it has been mainly specialists, planners, poli ce officers and (insurance) risk experts who have been active in this field. Authorities seem to be rather slow to understand that urban planning and building design are not only shaping a new urban environment but may also shape a new local policy for crime prevention and the reduction of fear of crime.
More info?
Send an e-mail to:
dsp@dsp-advies.nl or: p.soomeren@planet.nl
Page 20 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime DSP -Amsterdam
Curriculum Vitae
Paul van Soomeren (1 952) studied Social Geography at the University of Amsterdam and Urban and Regional Planning at the same University. He worked for three years at the Ministries of Justice and Intern al Affairs (National Crime Prevention Institute) and in 1984 founded with Bram van Dijk a private consultancy and research bureau under the name of Van Dijk, Van Soomeren en Partners (abbreviated DSP). Nowadays DSP has a staft of fifty, all of whom are academically qualified and have worked in government, private institutions, universities or commercial organizations.
DSP is an independent research and consultancy bureau specializing in urban planning and design, crime prevention and social management. The bureau carries out assignments for local and national government,
non-profit organizations and private companies.
Paul van Soomeren is director of the board of the International CPTED (crime prevention through environmental design) Association (lCA) and he is chairman of a European working group, working on European Standards on CPTED in new and existing environments.
Page 2 1 Crime prevention solutions for Europe: Designing Out Crime
DSP - Amsterdam
